Rules make zero sense in this case. The ball was already in the air and about 3 feet from entering the net when the whistle was blown, which had no effect on the play.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Agree, having realised now that the whistle stops the VAR intervening. More akin to the incidents last season like the goal being awarded despite being offside etc
Still it's all tied in to horrible reffing etc and the general culture
Once the whistle blows the game is stopped. The ref just had a brain fart which is ridiculous and it's not the first time we've seen something like this happen.
Because everyone stops playing. But if you look at the replay, its blown literally a split second before the ball goes in. There should be exceptions for cases like this, imagine if it were a cup final.
We should cut the referee some slack, he's a young ref just promoted from the Championship - broadly had a good game and a bit of a corner case scenario that he was exposed on.
It’s going to be another season filled with controversy due to the complete and utter incompetence of these clowns “officiating” the game.
Well the ref needs a right bollocking, and probably feels a bit of a tit, but I don't think you can make an exception to that rule. It's bizarre as the ref knows he's stopping the game when there's absolutely no need.
Sky trying to sweep it up but the ex pros having none of it 
Cup finals usually aren’t reffed by whistle hungry novices.
Once the whistle goes the game is stopped. You can't then award a goal.
There's no issue with the rules. That's just giving incompetent officiating another excuse to hide behind.
There's absolutely no reason or logic in that scenario for the ref to be blowing his whistle before seeing where the ball ends up
It's made even more ridiculous by the fact that there doesn't even seem to have been a foul committed at all.
Nah. The refs get far too much slack given how awful they are.
This is meant to be one of the top leagues in the world so should have some of the best officials. Decisions like that should juat never happen
But they will, every single week, all season. Because the officials are never accountable for it and don't have any standards applied to their performances
Referee just needed to wait a split second and VAR would've been able to do something.
Wasn't a foul on Collins, Hughes isn't blocking from an offside position so not impeding. Just a shockingly poor decision.
Wasn't a foul on Collins, Hughes isn't blocking from an offside position so not impeding. Just a shockingly poor decision.
Yep. Would have still been massively harsh if it came into the box and a palace player headed it in.
I don’t know why the whistle is anywhere near the refs lips at that point anyway. You’ve got the safety net of VAR to fall back on, just let the ball hit the back of the net and if there is a foul somewhere they can simply review things after the fact. Cuts out any unnecessary controversy.
The number of games that are so clearly influenced by their incompetence is depressing.
Quite easy to complain about something that's actually very easy to make human errors with.
The problem is they double down, justify human error and seem to be less interested in getting the right decision. There's zero accountability
That palace 2nd goal looked onside, no lines?
I want to see where they froze picture. Whole picture. Not legs. I thought that was offside.
I assume we've already covered the another choke which isn't a red because it's not Casemiro incident?
I don't think he's got it terribly wrong. There's probably about 3 seconds from when the ball is struck to when it hits the net.
The referee is looking right at Will Hughes sticking a leg out and tripping the Brentford player. He doesn't know how it's going to play out, so he sees the foul and blows his whistle right away. That ball could hit the post and come out and get tapped in, he's going to bring it back for the foul anyway. It's also hard to say it doesn't have any impact on the ball going in, Henderson also kind of gives up when he hears the whistle, so who knows, he may still have got there.
You saw a foul in that? I didn't see it on the replay and neither the commentators during the game, the pundits at half-time said it was a foul or showed any conclusive evidence of a foul.
He stands his ground but I don't think you can call it a trip.
Eze has also said the ref apologised to him and said he made a mistake.
Does anybody think this was a penalty? The consensus I’ve seen is people mostly think Enzo’s horrific first touch means he’s not in control of the ball when Savio barges into him, so therefore no pen but I can’t shake the feeling that foul would be given anywhere else on the pitch.
https://streamin.me/v/fa1ea21c
https://streamin.me/v/fa1ea21c
I didn't really see why the quality of his touch would come into it when the defender essentially pushes him over.
Unless they thought it was soft and he was playing for it. It could, of course, have been that he ref didn't really see it but feck it we're going with he refs call regardless.
EDIT: oh yeah I'd forgotten it was outside the box anyway.
Last edited:
Not for me, not only for that reason but it's outside the box. His toes on his left foot are just about on the line, but seeing as the contact was from behind, that contact isn't in the box.
The contact seems to be on his hamstring and back which seem to be ahead of his toes based on his body position. The toes are just about touching the line which is part of the penalty box. That’s not an obvious case of contact being outside the box for me based on the picture you’ve provided even though a side angle would be needed, but if you feel it’s a foul surely it’s very debatable whether it’s outside or notNot for me, not only for that reason but it's outside the box. His toes on his left foot are just about on the line, but seeing as the contact was from behind, that contact isn't in the box.
The foul, such as it was, occured outside the box. His toes maybe touching the line aren't what's important.
I disagree that his hamstring and back seem to be ahead of his toes. Not sure how you're seeing that in all honesty.
For hamstrings to be ahead of toes when your feet are relatvely parallel you'd need to be in an exaggerated deep squad position which he isn't and with weight on his toes he'd tip over in such a position anyway. You can have your hamstring ahead of your toes on your back leg easily if your front leg is miles out in front and you're in a "lunge" position but that's not the case here with his feet realtively square on.
Same with back, he's bent a little but he'd need to be bent over to a much greater extent for his back to be ahead of his toes there for me.
I don't see is at as a foul anyway. Well, not the kind a penalty should be awarded for. I'm ok with fouls for pens having a higher threshold han they are elsewhere for the most part, and due to miscontrol here plus the big debate as to where it was I'm fine with that as no penalty.
Last edited:
It's a harsh enough call, but Hughes clearly sticks his leg across the Brentford player as he's running back.
The ref saw it and gave it, he doesn't really know where the ball is going, bad luck for him that it flew in. If that goes wide or over nobody gives too fecks and says he probably got it right.
You'll have to provide a replay because I've not seen anyone say it's a clear foul, other than you.
If it's deemed a foul then it's a penalty because he's technically in the box.
It's right there, you can see at 40 seconds Hughes sticking a leg out. Referee was right there and gave it. Everyone just thinks he was wrong because the ball went in the goal.
I don't know what you're watching but that is not a clear cut foul to me at all. Players don't normally fall over from standing like that either so the Brentford lad is looking for it imo.
It's a sly foul, most players will have done it at some point, sometimes you get away with it, sometimes you don't.
Hughes knew right well what he was doing, he threw his leg out and tried to make it look like he didn't mean it, he didn't even protest that much. Which tells you all you need to know in situations like that.
Last edited:
It’s a more a foul by the Brentford player if anything. That said, on first view, I think there’s enough uncertainty that VAR wouldn’t have interfered anyway (given the new direction to stick to the original decision as much as possible anyway).
I think it's a foul but I'm not sure whether it was in the box or not. I think the laws should be applied equally no matter where you are on the pitch so I'd say it's a fouls either way. It did look a bit like a dive though so I understand why the ref didn't give it. Var should've got involved.
I thought that it extends to where the foul end.
The foul would need to continue into the box. That didn't happen as far as I recall. The contact all appeared to occur outside the box, from what I remember.
Agreed, clearly sticks a leg out.